He's definitely further along on the conspiracy theory spectrum than I am, but I think to dismiss any prospect of chicanery and exploitation of the pandemic by big pharma, big tech, government etc given those parties' histories is naive.
No shit. Now you need to reconcile how someone you've correctly assessed is a retard, how someone like that was able to predict everything like clockwork, whilst you were clowned about all of those very same things.
What is the relevance of where he is on the spectrum to the prospect of chicanery? I can accept that it is relevant if what you are deciding is whether to outsource your brain to this conspiracy theorist or else outsource your brain to the fake news. If that's genuinely what you're deciding then you needn't bother and instead expend your mental energy on figuring out what went wrong.
People can't do this.
five
hundred
pages
They want to make a slave class.. it's that simple.
It's no real wonder that the whole metaverse stuff comes out at the same time, easier to keep the slave class entertained while they plug themselves into the system...cos they can't travel.
I suppose it'll also help to control population if they spend so much time indoors and on the metaverse, they won't procreate, which is likely the link between plastics etc..
anyways yeah.
five
hundred
pages
Yes, it involves two shots, an anti-Rosco and an anti-Dantes. Don't worry, it won't hurt.Is there a vaccine for this thread?
Yes, it involves two shots, an anti-Rosco and an anti-Dantes. Don't worry, it won't hurt.
I haven't died from two doses.
That must mean I'm invincible!
You misread the r/conspiracy thread, try again.
I haven't died from two doses.
That must mean I'm invincible!
https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIR.0000000000001051
They've an expression of concern about the article. The first one is that the author spells mRNA wrong. The second is there's anecdotal evidence in the paper.
https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIR.0000000000001051
They've an expression of concern about the article. The first one is that the author spells mRNA wrong. The second is there's anecdotal evidence in the paper.
I dunno, I just read that expression of concern.What part of it is the anecdotal evidence?
Is there some.evidence to suggest males taking vaccine are more like to get these heart issues?
Re same chance of death with Pfizer and covid.. what are stats around hospitalisation.
Is there any further info around this reduction of viral load etc .